Disputatio:Rupertus Murdoch
The Latin inscription he has here at Worcester College due to his contribution to our library has his name fully in English, not "Rupertus" but "Rupert". Should we then move this page then to Rupert Murdoch considering that we have a source? [If you want, I'll post tomorrow thw inscription]--Xaverius 21:27, 17 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
- Or actually Keith Rupert Murdoch may be better?--Xaverius 18:23, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
- Don't we usually convert "given names" to Latin, no matter which language the person uses in "real life"? Hence, we'd use Rupertus (if that's a genuine Latin form). In bibliographies, we've been more conservative, and tend to reproduce names exactly as they appear in the cited publications. IacobusAmor 18:56, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
- Yes we do, but as I saw this inscription, I thought it could have counted as a source. The Queen has Latin inscriptions with her name but still keeps Elizabeth in them.--Xaverius 19:08, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
- Don't we usually convert "given names" to Latin, no matter which language the person uses in "real life"? Hence, we'd use Rupertus (if that's a genuine Latin form). In bibliographies, we've been more conservative, and tend to reproduce names exactly as they appear in the cited publications. IacobusAmor 18:56, 6 Aprilis 2008 (UTC)
"Investor"[fontem recensere]
Quid est fons verbi investor? Investire Anglice "to clothe, cover", ita investor Anglice "one who clothes, covers"? In lingua Anglica hanc etymologiam habemus, sed eum verbum ex sensu Italiano derivatur. Num indignum est derivare verbum Latinum e verbo Italiano quod ipsum e verbo Latino derivatum est? Et LRL habet investitore (Italice; Anglice investor) ut pecuniae collocator. --Robert.Baruch 14:35, 1 Iunii 2011 (UTC)